Review: "Man of Steel"

For me, one of the most striking images after 9/11 was on a local news report. The reporters did a regular feature on paintings and drawings made by Elementary School kids, based on current events. One child, after witnessing the terrorist attacks on New York, drew a crayon colored picture of Superman, stopping one of the planes from crashing into one of the towers, having arrived just in the nick of time. Sad that there is no real superhero in our world, but hopeful because potential for good exist within all of us. This meant more to me than President Bush standing on top of rubble, calling for payback.

You see, Superman is about doing the right thing, even in the face of unimaginable horror. He doesn't give in to senseless rage, nor does he use his powers for selfish reasons. Well... except for when he turned back time to save Lois Lane. And does breaking a man's neck count as rage if done to save a group of people?

It's hard making such decisions, especially when you can do almost anything. But, that's part of what makes the character so compelling. In his latest film adaptation Man of Steel, we get an origin story laden with this.

Before he was Clark Kent, he was named Kal-El, the first and last naturally born child of the planet Krypton. Knowing the destruction of that world was imminent, his parents launched him into space, sending the craft to Earth. There, he is raised by a kind hearted Kansas couple. He spends his youth struggling to do what comes naturally to him (saving the day) and trying to keep his abilities a secret (what his Earth parents want). Eventually, after years of drifting from place to place, he discovers a relic of his home world and learns his true destiny, just when we need him the most.

At first glance, this movie is merely a feast for the eyes. From Russell Crowe riding a dragon to a New York like Metropolis falling apart building by building, the level of visual candy and destruction is absolutely overwhelming. Punches, kicks, sonic booms and explosions are louder than in any superhero film I've seen recently. Leaving the theater, it felt like Director Zack Snyder out did his own style to the point of detriment. "A Superman movie for a new era" this was called. Fine, but what does it say of this era? Bigger is not necessarily better. They tried a slow moving drama with Superman Returns, and people complained that it lacked action. Well dummy, now you got it.

At second glance and after conversations with colleagues, I realized the enormous visuals distracted me from what was under the surface. Themes of self discovery, doubt and making difficult choices are strewn throughout. Clark spends many years learning just who he is exactly. He finally uncovers the truth (and his suit), and goes home to tell his mother, still confused as to what should happen next, but momentarily happy to have some answers. When General Zod, a Kryptonian with ties to his birth family, threatens Earth, Clark is given the reality check of a lifetime. Sometimes, the only way to get someone out of an existential rut is to shake them out of it.

From there, Clark puts on the suit, tries things out for the first time, and learns along the way just what he is made of. We don't get many scenes of dialogue expositing lessons learned, but we do get to see them as they happen. At one moment, he is forced to do an act he'll hopefully never have to do again, and gets emotional afterwards (you'll know it when you see it). He didn't do something as grand as turning back time, but it was just as jaw dropping to witness, and may haunt him for some time. This Superman is not yet whole as an individual, but is finally ready for the next phase of his life. Is the world ready?

Thrown headfirst into the dilemma of fighting against people of his past, to protect the people of his present, Clark's internal problems have become external, for everyone to see. He experiences one nightmare, only to wake into a real one. Using all of his powers to their fullest capabilities for the first time, he wings the situation, learning as he goes. Sure, it all comes naturally to him, and he is no longer holding back, but you get the sense that he may be uncertain (and possibly afraid) as how to win the day. Where Captain America is confident and steadfast, this Superman is powerful yet doubtful. He flies through the air with heavy emotion on his face, like someone rushing to complete multiple food orders (maybe more dramatic than that). He WANTS to save everyone, but doesn't really know HOW. It's the coming of age story of a lifetime, when you think about it. It's not going to be easy Supes, but just know we're all behind you.

In preparing this review, I doubted not only my rating of this movie, but also that of Star Trek Into Darkness, which I think shares something in common - both are big, loud, and on the surface deviate from the source material. It might appear that spectacle trumps smarts, but brain and brawn work side by side in both (to varying degrees). Still, what I would give for a 1970's style sci fi flick. We can handle it, Hollywood! Give me a depthful crayola drawing over a shallow photo op any day.  

4/5 - 5/5 *s, depending on how I feel at a given time.

Review: "Oblivion"

I have great affection for David Lynch’s Dune. It’s a movie that barely explains itself, but keeps throwing stuff at you anyways. Sure, The Original Star Wars Trilogy didn’t feel the need to spell everything out either, but it would at least establish and ground things to make the audience comfortable. Dune, on the other hand, expects you to have done some reading beforehand. Despite that problem, I really dig the flick. It’s a classic sci fi adventure with a weirdo modern (at the time) edge. It has a real “you just had to be there to understand” feel to it, and, knowing that I can never go back and “understand”, makes me love it even more.

The latest Tom Cruise movie Oblivion works well as a classic sci fi adventure, but without the special “you had to be there” feel. Actually, it’s really up to you if you want to go at all.

By no means is Oblivion bad; it’s a sleek looking and slickly told tale, constructed in a satisfying and easy to digest manner. At no time did I feel confused or out of place. It’s the kind of movie that makes you slurp an icee with glee and look forward to playing with your Wii when you get home (in fact, the ship Tom uses looks to be controlled by a Wii remote).

I just can’t say that it’s memorable. Is a cult following for this movie possible? Eh.

Tom Cruise plays yet another character named Jack, a technician assigned to maintaining the drones that protect mining machines on what is left of Earth. He must do this while fighting off the occasional Scav, the last of the aliens that invaded the planet years prior. Nearing the end of his mission, an old ship crash lands, revealing a woman Jack knows from his dreams. This leads him to a discovery that will determine the fate of humanity.

After the screening, I remarked to a friend that the story felt like the first in a franchise series, meant perhaps for a trilogy or something. Being a single film just feels off, as there are just lots of interesting things happening that deserve to be explored further. It really should’ve been an hour longer at least (seriously), giving us more to chew on. Morgan Freeman ends up expositing everything in a two minute sequence, clarifying for me that the producers just want you to shovel popcorn in your face while Tom Cruise shoots his gun.

To be fair, that isn’t too bad of a thing, as it actually works here. The visuals are top notch, Tom Cruise is at his most Tom Cruise and the action is fun. As a sci fi movie, it could’ve gone into philosophical territory regarding free will and blissful ignorance vs. knowing the truth, but opts instead for being adventurous on a superficial level. Disappointing, but hey - it works.

Dune, for all of its perceived faults, aimed for being something more than just space drama. It didn’t quite hit the mark, but the ambition was there. Oblivion is more than happy just sticking to what has worked before. It’s like the film equivalent of that guy who spends most of his life just chillin’, playing music and not making waves. Bless his heart, but please don’t follow in his footsteps.

3/5 *s

Review: "Cloud Atlas"

Cross posted from MoviePass:

During the AMC Theatres presentation of "The Dark Knight Trilogy", my friends and I took a quick trip to the nearest gas station, as my head was killing me and I needed some tylenol. In the car, one of them asked a pretty random question, regarding my relationship with god. I could've made a joke about him getting ready to kidnap us, but I decided to answer honestly; "I'm not christian, I'm just Bill."

Who are we, where are we going and what is the point of it all? Boiled down, my belief (I prefer idea) is that we have barely scratched the surface with understanding THIS reality - how can we possibly understand OTHER ones? Honestly, I feel more comfortable explaining myself in movie form. If you care to, check out "Groundhog Day", "Defending Your Life" and, now playing across the country, "Cloud Atlas".

Not sure about watching that last one? Think of it as "Magnolia" - one large story made up of multiple tales - but on an epic scale. Think of it as several different movies (a comedy, a sci fi thriller, a period piece, a drama, etc) told forward and sideways, bleeding into one another and making one massive film. Think of it as having the ambition of a D.W. Griffith or Abel Gance picture. Think of it as maybe...well, having to think afterwards. You still want to shell out money for that Rob Cohen "movie"?

It's amazing to me that such a chance could be taken on such an incredible story. Hollywood didn't have much faith in it, so the filmmakers had to go and raise the funds themselves! Making a movie in this manner, based on a book deemed unfilmmable, is either a sign of madness or courage. Perhaps both.

Some of the madness does show up on screen. We see Hugh Grant in warrior paint as some future scape headhunter, Tom Hanks as a bald British gangster/author and an Asian Hugo Weaving. At some point during production, I bet hesitation was felt by the producers.

But, all of the courage shows up as well. We get a wonderfully heartbreaking romance between two young men, a woman in the role of a messiah, a new language spoken, a lengthy duration and, most important, questions planted into the minds of the audience. At some point during production, I bet a sense of pride was felt by the crew.

Some people are dubbing this as some kind of a bomb, having cost so much, and making so little thus far. Some people are dubbing this as pretentious rubbish, and the worst thing everyone involved could've been part of. I will respond with one quote from the film:

When told that there is an order to the world, and that any attempts to shake it would just be a drop in an ocean, a character responds "What is an ocean but a multitude of drops?" This was probably made knowing that it wouldn't make much money, and with the hope that it will give pause to people who watch it.

The friend who asked me about god is an atheist. I'm still just Bill. To me, the universe is one long movie, made up of smaller storylines, leading to one big finish. It might not be presented in the most consumable of ways, it might shift in tone and it might be ridiculous at times, but trust me; it's all important, and it'll all make sense in the end.

5/5 *'s